Habitation service

[peacock312]

12 years ago i had a caravan serviced by a very reputable company with many years in business,they told me and showed me that i had a very serious damp problem,even giving a readout. due to my wifes sudden illness the van never moved for 3yrs. after she passed away i dragged the van out to sell it,2 companys gave me a phone quote subject to a damp test, test one =no damp,test two by Swindon caravans was very extensive,removing cushions and getting into every nook and cranny,my knees were shaking,but guess what NO DAMP FOUND ANYWHERE SIR WE WILL GIVE YOU THE PRICE WE QUOTED,i bought a new van from them,i have had 3 m/homes since,1 s/h 2 new, do it all myself now even during warranty period. a couple of my dealers have said.no hab service no warranty,i have said thats not legal as i have not signed any agreement,both backed off!makes you wonder?

[Brian Kirby]

peacock312 - 2012-10-31 2:53 PM........................... do it all myself now even during warranty period. a couple of my dealers have said.no hab service no warranty,i have said thats not legal as i have not signed any agreement,both backed off!makes you wonder?

If these are new van warranties you are referring to, I suspect you may indeed have voided them by doing the work yourself. The warranty conditions are set out by the manufacturer, and there is basically no legal constraint on what they can say, and you have no legal come-back against the manufacturer because you don't buy from him, but from a dealer. If the warranty states that certain work must be carried out by some authorised person (for example a dealer for that brand of van), and they are not, then the warranty is very liable to be declared void.

 

You do have a come-back against the dealer, not under the warranty, but under consumer legislation. If you have been warned by the dealer that doing the work yourself will void your warranty, you may find the dealer rejects responsibility for defects on those grounds. You would then have to take the dealer to court to try to compel him to carry out repairs at his own expense, and he would probably argue that by deliberately voiding the warranty, you were seeking to impose unreasonable costs on him. Unreasonable, because if the warranty had been maintained, the manufacturer would reimburse his costs in carrying out repairs, also supplying the necessary materials FOC. Which way the court would then jump I have no idea, but if I were the Judge, I think I would listen to the dealer with some sympathy. So, why take the risk of having to foot the whole repair bill yourself when, by having annual checks carried out by the dealer, someone else, (basically he who built in the fault) will pick up the bill?

 

Consumer legislation is of little to no help with warranties, which are merely non-contractual, unenforceable, offers from manufacturers to repair just what the warranty says they will repair, on the terms of the warranty, and as interpreted by the manufacturer. However little cover the warranty may offer, it is liable to work out far cheaper to pay to maintain it, than to bring a court case that has an in-built risk of failure, and still have to pay for, or toward, the repair costs.

[mike 202]

Regards Damp in the motorhome ? A bit of an off the wall idea, but if the van was a bit damp then I wonder what the reading would show after a few weeks holiday in the sun in Spain in say June ( obviously before the prices go up).

If this approach would dry out the van then a holiday to the sun and then PX in late June/Early July could maybee solve a problem.

Of course no one on this forum would use such tactics to deceive the many honest dealers out there, would they ?????

[peacock312]

brian,have you missed my point?as i said i have bought 2 new motorhomes in last 7 years,i did not have habitation services done on either,when i needed some minor warranties first question was,have you had a habitation service?no said i,then no warranty said dealers,not legaly enforcible said i ,i believe under sale of goods act,stating that you must have annual service at your cost or no warranty is questionable,i had a retail business for 20 years,selling quality lawnmowers and Honda tried this and it was dropped for the reasons i have just stated.

I fully agree that a gas test annually is good sense,but with gas fail safe systems,crash proof pipes etc. on newer vans the need is i feel reducing.

Finally,i once asked a very honest service manager from a very good dealership,just what a habitation service involved,he said,gas&damp test, test functions of all equipment,inc.lighting etc but no service of fridges or flushing toilets or hob or oven servicing,no boiler servicing and so on. nothing is touched on base vehicle,but the cost can be as much £150.00 for what?to reclaim some profit on competive market sales.??

[lennyhb]

Never had a habitation service & never had a problem with warranty claims, dealer we brought from attitude is only needs doing every 5 years.

[Brian Kirby]

peacock312 - 2012-10-31 8:40 PM

 

brian,have you missed my point?as i said i have bought 2 new motorhomes in last 7 years,i did not have habitation services done on either,when i needed some minor warranties first question was,have you had a habitation service?no said i,then no warranty said dealers,not legaly enforcible said i ,i believe under sale of goods act,stating that you must have annual service at your cost or no warranty is questionable,i had a retail business for 20 years,selling quality lawnmowers and Honda tried this and it was dropped for the reasons i have just stated.

I fully agree that a gas test annually is good sense,but with gas fail safe systems,crash proof pipes etc. on newer vans the need is i feel reducing.

Finally,i once asked a very honest service manager from a very good dealership,just what a habitation service involved,he said,gas&damp test, test functions of all equipment,inc.lighting etc but no service of fridges or flushing toilets or hob or oven servicing,no boiler servicing and so on. nothing is touched on base vehicle,but the cost can be as much £150.00 for what?to reclaim some profit on competive market sales.??

No, I don't think I have missed your point, though I may not yet have understood it. My understanding is that where a warranty states certain actions must be performed by certain people at certain times, if they are not so performed, the warranty is void. The warranter will decide what latitude to give, but his decision is not generally open to legal challenge.

 

It is true that car warranties now have to allow buyers to have servicing carried out by independent (i.e. non-franchised) garages, but that does not, AFAIK, extend to DIY servicing.

 

But, motorhomes are not cars. The OFT negotiated the change to allow non-franchised garages to carry out servicing in 2004, but all references are to garages and cars. I assume, therefore, this would apply to the mechanical servicing of motorhomes, but also assume it does not apply equally to servicing other serviceable parts of a motorhome.

 

If you get a major problem, and the maker rejects your claim because he regards your warranty as void, on the grounds that you have knowingly breached its terms, what then? To whom would you turn for redress? That is my point.

[Airstream]

All warranties are over and above your rights under the legislation and in fact less than that covered

Swift are replacing rotten floors on vans produced in 2006 !!! not under ant warranty but fit for purpose

 

Hab checks are just a money making con and serve no real purpose other than to expose the fact that motorhome manufacturers cant make a van that keeps the water out - good job they dont make boats

 

Inland waterways "mot" is every four years and prescribed in law, covers more than a so called hab service and costs less despite the cost to the examiner in issuing the certificate which is required to get insurance and a license to sail your boat on the waterways

 

Examiners for the boat safety cert have to be qualified and registered and all new inland waterways craft have to by law to conform to the recreational craft directive - standards that make motorhomes look like dinky toys

 

Ray

[Brian Kirby]

Airstream - 2012-11-03 9:50 PM

 

All warranties are over and above your rights under the legislation and in fact less than that covered

Swift are replacing rotten floors on vans produced in 2006 !!! not under ant warranty but fit for purpose

 

Hab checks are just a money making con and serve no real purpose other than to expose the fact that motorhome manufacturers cant make a van that keeps the water out - good job they dont make boats..................Ray

I would not say warranties are "over and above" statutory consumer rights, merely that they are additional to those rights. However, they have one considerable advantage over consumer rights, which is that they are usually available to the buyer without protracted argument, or recourse to the courts.

 

I doubt Swift are replacing rotten floors under consumer legislation, as you infer. The buyer's contract is with the seller and, as Swift do not sell direct to the public, the contractual relationship is with the selling dealer. It would be the dealer who would be liable to the claim that the goods were not of merchantable quality, not Swift.

 

Either Swift have made the decision to replace these floors at their own expense to protect their reputation, or because they felt a moral responsibility for the quality failure, or because one or more dealers approached them on behalf of their customers with a demand they should do so. What argument might have been used I have no idea, and I doubt anyone will say!

 

Habitation checks should include a damp check, but may not, depending on what is offered/agreed between the parties. Equally, a damp check can be carried out without a habitation service.

 

If a warranty states that a full habitation service must be carried out to maintain a water ingress warranty in place, as I understand some do, it is for the buyer to ask why it is necessary to check that the cooker is working properly in order to know that the van is not leaking. It is, IMO, wholly unreasonable to make a specific aspect of a warranty dependent upon inspection, at the owner's expense, of unrelated items. Anyone with such a warranty should consult Consumer Direct to get their advice on its enforceability.

 

However, properly executed habitation services are not a "money making con", as you state. They check the safety of mains and 12V electrical installations, gas installations, and the proper operation of installed equipment. For those with the knowledge and skills to make these checks themselves, they are not necessary, but for the many motorhomers who lack those skills and that knowledge, they are potentially life-saving, and at the very least provide annual verification that their vans are safe to use, and working properly.

[Mel B]

Brian Kirby - 2012-11-04 11:10 AM

 

However, properly executed habitation services are not a "money making con", as you state. They check the safety of mains and 12V electrical installations, gas installations, and the proper operation of installed equipment. For those with the knowledge and skills to make these checks themselves, they are not necessary, but for the many motorhomers who lack those skills and that knowledge, they are potentially life-saving, and at the very least provide annual verification that their vans are safe to use, and working properly.

Not necessarily Brian - we had a full habitatino check carried out a certain large motorhome dealer on our Rapido a few years ago and 2 months afterwards the BBQ gas installation failed (I'd told them I thought I could smell gas!) and we had a blow torch in the camper! 8-) The installation had been installed wrongly - they put it in originally - so it should have been 'found' on one of the 2 habitation checks that had been carried out since it was installed.

[Brian Kirby]

Mel B - 2012-11-04 9:20 PM...............Not necessarily Brian - we had a full habitatino check carried out a certain large motorhome dealer on our Rapido a few years ago and 2 months afterwards the BBQ gas installation failed (I'd told them I thought I could smell gas!) and we had a blow torch in the camper! 8-) The installation had been installed wrongly - they put it in originally - so it should have been 'found' on one of the 2 habitation checks that had been carried out since it was installed.

OK Mel, then don't have one, on the basis of your experience.

 

But, you had the service, so you had the verification, which gave you evidence on which to sue if necessary. What evidence would you have had after two years had you not had the service?

 

Besides, if the gas system was properly checked, it cannot have been leaking when tested, so can only have been deemed safe. If it was not properly checked, and the check record said it was, you had the evidence of that also.

 

No snapshot test can do other than detect faults present at the time of testing, using accepted test methods. Poor workmanship or faulty materials can fail at any time, tests or no tests. It is a matter of which is generally the safer approach. Ignore it and trust to luck, or have it periodically checked? Perfection is for the next world. Your call!

[Dr Dave]

Brian Kirby - 2012-11-05 12:37 AM

 

Mel B - 2012-11-04 9:20 PM...............Not necessarily Brian - we had a full habitatino check carried out a certain large motorhome dealer on our Rapido a few years ago and 2 months afterwards the BBQ gas installation failed (I'd told them I thought I could smell gas!) and we had a blow torch in the camper! 8-) The installation had been installed wrongly - they put it in originally - so it should have been 'found' on one of the 2 habitation checks that had been carried out since it was installed.

OK Mel, then don't have one, on the basis of your experience.

 

But, you had the service, so you had the verification, which gave you evidence on which to sue if necessary. What evidence would you have had after two years had you not had the service?

 

Besides, if the gas system was properly checked, it cannot have been leaking when tested, so can only have been deemed safe. If it was not properly checked, and the check record said it was, you had the evidence of that also.

 

No snapshot test can do other than detect faults present at the time of testing, using accepted test methods. Poor workmanship or faulty materials can fail at any time, tests or no tests. It is a matter of which is generally the safer approach. Ignore it and trust to luck, or have it periodically checked? Perfection is for the next world. Your call!

 

Thats you told Mel.

 

Over my many years i have yet to come people who are as meticulous when servicing testing or working on other peoples equipment as you would be if it was your own. So to infer that a habitation check will put your mind at rest because everything is tested and working perfectly is folly. The test could have been a box ticking exercise because to do the full habitation check properly could take some valuable workshop time and if the workshop is busy you can envisage the rest, and as for comebacks 'well it was o/k when we tested it' As with everything its down to who you put your trust in. Because in a perfect world the senior engineer will do the habitation check and test everything, in a less than perfect world the workshop 'Lad' will do it.

[Brian Kirby]

Blimey, I didn't think it could be be made so complicated!

 

I assume that, warranty requirements apart, those who are confident to do the basic checks will DIY, and those who are not, or simply prefer not to do so, will have the habitation service professionally executed. Others may decide, as some seem to, that it is all a waste of money, and not bother.

 

Why is this so hard?

 

An MoT test on a car is supposed to check a variety of things. Two things are clear. First, not all testers reach the same conclusions on any given vehicle, because they have to exercise judgement in certain areas. Second, that the result relates only to the car as presented, and tested, on the day. If, two weeks later one's tyre were to blow its valve, and cause a near accident, is that the tester's fault? Suppose one had mentioned one tyre was losing pressure more than others to the tester beforehand. He could well look at the tyre, and within the duration of the test find nothing amiss. Would that subsequent blow-out prove that MoT tests are worthless? Or even conclusively prove that the tester was negligent? Would one not have been wiser, on finding a tyre kept losing pressure, to take the car to a tyre fitter for proper examination, even if that meant removing the tyre from the rim to investigate fully?

 

Simply relying on the result of an annual check as evidence anything mechanical will REMAIN in satisfactory condition for the next 12 months is, indeed, folly. All it tells you is that it was OK then. If subsequent problems arise, it no more proves the test valueless, than that the moon is made of green cheese! :-)

[Airstream]

I carry out my own "habitation" inspections every few months I use my own version of the check sheet

 

http://www.approvedworkshops.co.uk/assets/AWS-Motorhome-Annual-Habitation-Checksheet-V4-SAMPLE-Part-1.pdf

 

99% of the checks are common sense or things you use or check every time you use your motorhome

 

The only two items I consider essential are a "damp test" and a gas leak test, both simple if you have the kit I use a protimeter mini damp tester as used by most dealers and diy gas pressure test kit

 

My own van had checks whilst under warranty and one found damp/water ingress , however the rotting floor I found myself as the underfloor area is not inspected!! and ingress at the rear found by Swift at the factory when repairing the floor??

 

On my last inspection I found a slightly high reading due to a cracked side marker lamp lens - all four were cracked ?

 

I believe 12 months is to long between damp checks - gas pressure check is for my peace of mind

 

I do my own then I am 100% sure each and every item has been checked ans checked properly

not just a box ticking exercise

 

Would I pay £200+ ? no way, have a damp/gas test or buy from a dealer who does hab checks FOC

 

Its a disgrace that manufacturers have so little faith in what they produce that they expect the customer to pay for the privilege of finding faults in a very expensive product due to poor design and manufacture

 

Ray

[Mel B]

Stop being so pedantic Brian! *-)

 

I didn't say NOT to have it done what I was trying to draw attention to was the fact, which Dave understood, that you should not RELY on the habitation service to ensure your van is okay.

 

Our incident with the gas shouldn't have happened especially since I had mentioned the gas smell when it went in for the habitation service and it wasn't found when the gas check was done. I don't know why, but it wasn't and as they were the 'experts' we trusted it had been done properly (and at quite a cost!), one place we would NEVER use again and therefore wouldn't buy a van off them because of it (as you have to use them if you do!).

 

What happened? The main gas pipe feed, which runs in the cupboard to the isolating taps, had come out of it's coupling piece where a BBQ point had been fitted when we bought the 'van. The pipe had then left a clear gap of nearly half and inch between it and the coupling - when the gas was turned on at the cylinder it was literally like someone turning on a blow torch, opening the door to the cupboard appears to have allowed an influx of air which caused the gas to ignite causing the bang and subsequent 5ft blow torch effect (no I am NOT exaggerating!) until the gas was turned off. When it was inspected by a gas engineer afterwards it was found that they'd 'rammed' the gas pipe into the nut and olive, rather than take it off and put the olive on properly, and that plus the short length of the pipe had put pressure on the joint and eventually it gave way. His report was damming and they had to strip out the whole of the BBQ piping and re-do it 'properly'.

[Brian Kirby]

Mel B - 2012-11-05 5:57 PM

 

Stop being so pedantic Brian! *-)

 

I didn't say NOT to have it done what I was trying to draw attention to was the fact, which Dave understood, that you should not RELY on the habitation service to ensure your van is okay. ...........................

Then we are in complete agreement Mel, and I'm sorry I misunderstood. :-)

 

It seemed to me that you were, indeed, questioning the general usefulness of these checks. My point was that they are of some value, in the same way all such checks have some value. They are a lot better than nothing, IMO.

 

Don't forget I was responding to a poster who had denounced them as a money making con, which I think a dangerously inaccurate portrayal of their benefit. My concern was that some might be tempted to abandon habitation checks by such a wild and uninformed assertion.

[Airstream]

Perhaps a closer read of what is being stated - £200 + for a couple of hours "checking" - read the contents of the link given to see what the bulk of the check is - there is no "service " content

 

If you go to 3 hours at minimum wage its £18.57 labour cost and no materials - as I stated damp check yes, gas pressure test yes - the rest common sense, if not a money making con? how about poor value for money?

 

If a new van under manufacturers warranty, get the dealer to pay for this as part of your deal - some do this as the norm.

 

Those who do not have the ability,time or simply dont mind the cost then have the hab check but go for guys like Mark at CLS who is happy to let you see what he does and charges around half what the dealers ask

 

Its all about choice and the confidence that the checks are completed by a competent person - only one of the three hab checks I have had have been 100% and that was the first one (CLS) , second did not spot the rotting floor! even the one completed by Swift did not pick up a faulty electrical panel and they could not do a gas pressure test as there was no test point on the system

 

Ray

 

PS only 3 hab checks in 30 yrs of motorhome ownership as initially no such thing then 6 Hymers 5 from Madisons who only required a damp check and they did this FOC 6th Hymer imported direct from Germany so no warranty anyway and no faults, last van before my Swift was a self build Reimo kit

R.

 

 

[Mel B]

I think that habitation checks for some dealers ARE a money making scheme. >:-(

 

When I was trying to book our previous Chausson in for a habitation check I contacted two of Lowdham's dealers, the Huddersfield branch wanted £142 including VAT, the one at Nottingham wanted £315 including VAT!!!! I reiterate - they were the SAME DEALER NETWORK and not a massive distance apart! What I couldn't fathom was why there was such an absolutely MASSIVE discrepancy. 8-) Even taking into account any differences in site and labour costs, the difference of £173 was just plain greedy ... no other word for it. 8-)

 

Fortunately our Accent can be done at any Swift Group Service Centre or even by an 'unauthorised' repairer or service centre so long as they habitation service is "performed in accordance with the requirements" in the handbook, so we're not tied to the dealer we bought it from.

[Mel B]

Ref the above, it isn't as 'clear cut' about others (unregistered with Swift) places doing the habitation service on our Autocruise - there's a thread running on their Forum at the moment about this and the response from someone at Swift seems to contradict what the warranty says so I've asked for clarification.

[Pete-B]

What would one expect to pay for a damp check at a dealer?

[Mel B]

Pete-B - 2012-11-05 9:20 PM

 

What would one expect to pay for a damp check at a dealer?

 

As much as they can get away with! (lol)

 

Seriously though, many dealers won't do a damp check on their own, only as part of a habitation service - we found this out when we had a Rimor motorhome which had to have 6 monthly damp checked for the water ingress warranty, fortunately we managed to find a local chap who was registered with Rimor who was able to do it for us, I think it cost us £44.

[Brian Kirby]

Pete-B - 2012-11-05 9:20 PM

 

What would one expect to pay for a damp check at a dealer?

£65, this October.

[Brian Kirby]

Airstream - 2012-11-05 7:31 PM

 

Perhaps a closer read of what is being stated - £200 + for a couple of hours "checking" - read the contents of the link given to see what the bulk of the check is - there is no "service " content

 

If you go to 3 hours at minimum wage its £18.57 labour cost and no materials - as I stated damp check yes, gas pressure test yes - the rest common sense, if not a money making con? how about poor value for money?..................

All well and good, Ray, but you are being rather selective. All you want is damp and gas checked. If you ask for just those to be done, I assume you pay accordingly? No-one is imposing the rest on you.

 

Unless you are an electrician, I'd think adding the 230V and 12V systems to the test would be wise. However, that is obviously your prerogative.

 

However, if you have the full list completed by someone competent (which you will presumably say begs a question :-)), it will take time, and cost correspondingly more. Your rate may be what the employee is paid, but that will be far below what he costs to employ, and you must then add fixed and variable business overheads. These obviously vary from place to place, and time to time, but garages and motorhome dealerships down here are curently at around £60 per hour. If the hab service takes around 3 hours, as you imply, around £200 seems to what would be charged.

 

A con, which I understand to mean a confidence trick, would be where someone charged for the service and didn't carry it out, or completed only part while pretending to have done the lot. It has been known! :-D However, while that represents poor value as well as fraud, potential dishonesty shouldn't be the yardstick for measuring the value of a properly executed service, should it?

 

That a hab service may cost more than you wish to pay doesn't automatically make it a con, nor does it make the service provider dishonest. It may just be that your expectation of what it is reasonable to charge is unrealistic. If so, as above, you can always choose to have less done, to DIY, or to look for cheaper providers. Even so, it still doesn't make the main dealer's service a con, unless he charges for it, but doesn't do it.